"Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change."
So what WILL they be scanned and used for?
Probably the same thing Apple scans user email for: Spam filtering and malware/phishing protection. I think I also read something a couple years back (perhaps earlier) that email services like those provided by Apple and Google also scan for child porn?
Why don't you experiment on this for us and report back (if you can)?
Will people ever figure out that Google is not a tech company? Google is an advertising company. With Google YOU are the product they sell. Every service they offer, every product they sell is designed to make YOU a better product for them. Who writes checks to Google? Consumers? Nope, especially not with all those “free" services they offer. Google’s main income is from advertisers who buy their product...YOU! Google, the gargantuan AD company masquerading as a tech company.
Google is also a tech company. I've seen the mysterious Google boxes in data centers, sitting with lights off in cages with access restricted to Google employees only. It starts there and ends with the Chromecast at the other end of the scale.
Translation: we already know so much about you from tracking your searches, browsing habits, location, purchasing habits, etc. that we don’t need to do this anymore.
Just don't use Gmail...problem solved! Why anyone would use any Google service is beyond me...
Well, for starters, if it's a managed domain at your place of work you will probably need to use it. I use it for convenience but it's just one mail service of many that I use.
Will people ever figure out that Google is not a tech company? Google is an advertising company. With Google YOU are the product they sell. Every service they offer, every product they sell is designed to make YOU a better product for them. Who writes checks to Google? Consumers? Nope, especially not with all those “free" services they offer. Google’s main income is from advertisers who buy their product...YOU! Google, the gargantuan AD company masquerading as a tech company.
They're quite obviously both, unless they have the most magical facade the world has ever seen that just makes us just THINK they've developed a few OS'es, engineered various pieces of simple yet quite effective hardware, created new and more simplified coding languages, delved into medical treatments, studies and devices, worked on satellite technologies, experimented with new ways to deliver internet services to the remotest and often poorest parts of the planet, and on and on.
And also quite obviously many of their "moonshots" had nothing to do with ads. From the outside looking in Google sure looks like they do some stuff just to try and make our lives better. Not everything of course, but give 'em credit for being the good guys with no expectation of being paid back at least once in awhile.
Going through that large list of yours, I can't seem to find a single item that actually got widely implemented beyond some very limited geographical experimenting, or that a large group of people have benefitted from. Further, it seemed Google had no interest in doing so. Notice the language you used, "delved into", "experimented with"- why didn't any of these amount to something real, or mainstream? A strong argument can be made that in Google's eyes, these "initiative" only serve to increase their profile, and thus the usage of Google serves, and thus ad revenue. And it works- blogs and news sites breathlessly report on these, most of which dissipate into nothing a year later. Google has shown little to no interest in actually committing seriously to any of these moonshots in any real way. What happened to Google Fiber? Google Glass? These technologies only served to get people talking, and at the end of the day they didn't change anything. As for Google's other hardware products like chromebooks or pixels, I would argue that they add little value to the world beyond being vessels of Google services.
Will people ever figure out that Google is not a tech company? Google is an advertising company. With Google YOU are the product they sell. Every service they offer, every product they sell is designed to make YOU a better product for them. Who writes checks to Google? Consumers? Nope, especially not with all those “free" services they offer. Google’s main income is from advertisers who buy their product...YOU! Google, the gargantuan AD company masquerading as a tech company.
Google is also a tech company. I've seen the mysterious Google boxes in data centers, sitting with lights off in cages with access restricted to Google employees only. It starts there and ends with the Chromecast at the other end of the scale.
How many data centers/servers they have is irrelevant. Where they make their money is. And the vast majority of their revenue is from ads. Making them an advertising company first and foremost.
Apologism sure is one of the biggest psychoactive hallucinogens around, to look at Google and see only goodness, when their whole reason for being is so nefarious is appalling. FFS, they are in business to help other companies find better, more secret ways to extract money from your wallet for goods and services you neither need nor want, and the way they do this is to violate your privacy and sell what they discover about you to the highest bidders. I can't actually think of companies more evil than tha except maybe defence contractors who profit from humans killing each other in scale.
Will people ever figure out that Google is not a tech company? Google is an advertising company. With Google YOU are the product they sell. Every service they offer, every product they sell is designed to make YOU a better product for them. Who writes checks to Google? Consumers? Nope, especially not with all those “free" services they offer. Google’s main income is from advertisers who buy their product...YOU! Google, the gargantuan AD company masquerading as a tech company.
Google is also a tech company. I've seen the mysterious Google boxes in data centers, sitting with lights off in cages with access restricted to Google employees only. It starts there and ends with the Chromecast at the other end of the scale.
How many data centers/servers they have is irrelevant. Where they make their money is. And the vast majority of their revenue is from ads. Making them an advertising company first and foremost.
Not at all irrelevant. I was replying to the notion that Google wasn't a tech company, not its business model. It is both even if some of the tech is never aired for all to see.
My gmail account is viewed via my MacOS email client, or the mail app on my iPhone. I get zero ads. I rarely (if ever) log into gmail via a web browser. Don't many people do that? It's almost zero effort to set that up.
What if someone uses Gmail via Readdle's Spark app, which is only "free" because Readdle or its affiliates are allowed to scan the account? (I wouldn't touch Spark with a ten foot pole because of that.)
My gmail account is viewed via my MacOS email client, or the mail app on my iPhone. I get zero ads. I rarely (if ever) log into gmail via a web browser. Don't many people do that? It's almost zero effort to set that up.
Google still has ways of tracking you and targeting you, starting with the IP address. If/when you run a Google search, the ads you see can be tailored to your IP address.
"Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change."
So what WILL they be scanned and used for?
Probably the same thing Apple scans user email for: Spam filtering and malware/phishing protection. I think I also read something a couple years back (perhaps earlier) that email services like those provided by Apple and Google also scan for child porn?
Given their spin on this as a privacy benefit, I would have expected them to say that, if it were the case. The fact that they instead simply qualified their statements with the one thing it won't be scanned for leaves the door wide open.
Just not for ads.
Here ya go, via Ars: Google will still scan all your e-mails for search indexing, filtering, spam and virus detection, and the new smart reply feature
Those are merely the words of the ars writer, not the official wording. The only official wording that I've seen so far simply said "consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change.", which leaves room for interpretation as to the full extent of what the content will be used for after the change.
For me, I hope this is a step in the right direction, but I'm not convinced. The problem isn't that the data is being used to show ads, that's just the in-your-face part that most people are paying attention to. The deeper problem is that the data is being used to create psychological and behavioral profiles of every individual in the world (to the best of their ability). I don't give a crap if they're showing ads, I do give a crap that they are building psychometric profiles. That has not been addressed. If they're really turning over a new leaf they should make it VERY clear exactly how the content (and meta data) gathered while using their tools is used. I doubt very much that will be forthcoming.
My gmail account is viewed via my MacOS email client, or the mail app on my iPhone. I get zero ads. I rarely (if ever) log into gmail via a web browser. Don't many people do that? It's almost zero effort to set that up.
Regardless of seeing ads, everything you've ever typed to your family, friends and coworkers was sucked up by google and used to create a psychological profile of you. The only difference is that you're not seeing the results of that data mining in your face every day.
"Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change."
So what WILL they be scanned and used for?
Probably the same thing Apple scans user email for: Spam filtering and malware/phishing protection. I think I also read something a couple years back (perhaps earlier) that email services like those provided by Apple and Google also scan for child porn?
Given their spin on this as a privacy benefit, I would have expected them to say that, if it were the case. The fact that they instead simply qualified their statements with the one thing it won't be scanned for leaves the door wide open.
Just not for ads.
Here ya go, via Ars: Google will still scan all your e-mails for search indexing, filtering, spam and virus detection, and the new smart reply feature
Those are merely the words of the ars writer, not the official wording. The only official wording that I've seen so far simply said "consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change.", which leaves room for interpretation as to the full extent of what the content will be used for after the change.
The deeper problem is that the data is being used to create psychological and behavioral profiles of every individual in the world (to the best of their ability). I don't give a crap if they're showing ads, I do give a crap that they are building psychometric profiles. That has not been addressed. If they're really turning over a new leaf they should make it VERY clear exactly how the content (and meta data) gathered while using their tools is used. I doubt very much that will be forthcoming.
Before the merged TOS for Google services in general this is what Google said they scanned Gmail for: Our automated systems analyse your content (including emails) to provide you personally relevant product features, such as customised search results, tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection. This analysis occurs as the content is sent, received, and when it is stored.”
So now strip targeted advertising out of that. Certainly doesn't sound too worrisome, no more so than even a website like AI. At least they aren't in the business of selling personally identifiable data like so many other companies you share your information with, unless of course you believe they do that too.
So now tell me more about these psychometric profiles Google is building. Where did you learn about them and where can we find out more about it? I remember reading about Facebook in that regard but yours is the first mention I've ever seen about Google doing so.
My gmail account is viewed via my MacOS email client, or the mail app on my iPhone. I get zero ads. I rarely (if ever) log into gmail via a web browser. Don't many people do that? It's almost zero effort to set that up.
Regardless of seeing ads, everything you've ever typed to your family, friends and coworkers was sucked up by google and used to create a psychological profile of you. The only difference is that you're not seeing the results of that data mining in your face every day.
That's another claim that I'd love to see evidence of, unless of course it's simply a guess of yours which you're certainly entitled to believe. From all that I've read Google, Yahoo, Earthlink, etc use machine scanning for keywords applicable to advertising categories. Is that not true and if not where did you learn about this?
My gmail account is viewed via my MacOS email client, or the mail app on my iPhone. I get zero ads. I rarely (if ever) log into gmail via a web browser. Don't many people do that? It's almost zero effort to set that up.
Google still has ways of tracking you and targeting you, starting with the IP address. If/when you run a Google search, the ads you see can be tailored to your IP address.
How does that work with dynamic addresses? Seems like that would be a very poor way to track users for a few different reasons. Now if instead you mean Google and other ad placement providers can use an IP address to determine where in the world a request is coming from to show ads pertinent to that area, yeah that makes sense. But not for targeting an ad at you specifically from my limited knowledge of how it all works.
"Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change."
So what WILL they be scanned and used for?
Probably the same thing Apple scans user email for: Spam filtering and malware/phishing protection. I think I also read something a couple years back (perhaps earlier) that email services like those provided by Apple and Google also scan for child porn?
Given their spin on this as a privacy benefit, I would have expected them to say that, if it were the case. The fact that they instead simply qualified their statements with the one thing it won't be scanned for leaves the door wide open.
Comments
Translation: we already know so much about you from tracking your searches, browsing habits, location, purchasing habits, etc. that we don’t need to do this anymore.
Going through that large list of yours, I can't seem to find a single item that actually got widely implemented beyond some very limited geographical experimenting, or that a large group of people have benefitted from. Further, it seemed Google had no interest in doing so. Notice the language you used, "delved into", "experimented with"- why didn't any of these amount to something real, or mainstream? A strong argument can be made that in Google's eyes, these "initiative" only serve to increase their profile, and thus the usage of Google serves, and thus ad revenue. And it works- blogs and news sites breathlessly report on these, most of which dissipate into nothing a year later. Google has shown little to no interest in actually committing seriously to any of these moonshots in any real way. What happened to Google Fiber? Google Glass? These technologies only served to get people talking, and at the end of the day they didn't change anything. As for Google's other hardware products like chromebooks or pixels, I would argue that they add little value to the world beyond being vessels of Google services.
How many data centers/servers they have is irrelevant. Where they make their money is. And the vast majority of their revenue is from ads. Making them an advertising company first and foremost.
(I wouldn't touch Spark with a ten foot pole because of that.)
Those are merely the words of the ars writer, not the official wording. The only official wording that I've seen so far simply said "consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change.", which leaves room for interpretation as to the full extent of what the content will be used for after the change.
For me, I hope this is a step in the right direction, but I'm not convinced. The problem isn't that the data is being used to show ads, that's just the in-your-face part that most people are paying attention to. The deeper problem is that the data is being used to create psychological and behavioral profiles of every individual in the world (to the best of their ability). I don't give a crap if they're showing ads, I do give a crap that they are building psychometric profiles. That has not been addressed. If they're really turning over a new leaf they should make it VERY clear exactly how the content (and meta data) gathered while using their tools is used. I doubt very much that will be forthcoming.
Our automated systems analyse your content (including emails) to provide you personally relevant product features, such as customised search results, tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection. This analysis occurs as the content is sent, received, and when it is stored.”
So now strip targeted advertising out of that. Certainly doesn't sound too worrisome, no more so than even a website like AI. At least they aren't in the business of selling personally identifiable data like so many other companies you share your information with, unless of course you believe they do that too.
So now tell me more about these psychometric profiles Google is building. Where did you learn about them and where can we find out more about it? I remember reading about Facebook in that regard but yours is the first mention I've ever seen about Google doing so.